[GNUz] [Fwd: Re: RMS to visit NZ] - The Great Hall Sponsorship Application

[Don Gould]

Rik you were talking about getting this put to bed over the weekend...

We're running out of weekend.

Cheers Don

Don Gould wrote:
> Tim wrote:
>> Don Gould wrote:
>>> Please don't flame me, if you have issue then let's hear why.
>> It's a great letter :^)
> 
> Thanks Tim.
> 
>> Just a couple of tiny things I'd (personally) change...
>>
>>> -----------------
>>> Richard Stallman is to free software what Bill Gates is to commercial 
>>> software.
>> I'd change that 'commercial' to 'proprietary'. One of Microsoft's
>> favourite habits is to describe Free and Open Source Software as
>> "non-commercial", as a way of making it sound unsuitable for commercial
>> use.
> 
> I strongly disagree with you.
> 
> aa.  The audience of this letter is Nigel.  I don't know, but I doubt, 
> he knows sweet FA about what Microsoft attempt to do to discredit 
> software that is not their own.
> 
> bb.  I used the term 'commercial' because it infers the involvement of 
> money.
> 
> Most people understand the difference between commercial and 
> non-commercial as meaning money and no money.
> 
> What does 'proprietary' mean to people?
> 
> In my draft, I'm trying to convince the reader, Nigel, that we have no 
> money and neither does RMS.  This is why we want CA to give us the venue 
> for free.
> 
> I am trying to keep the issue as simple as possible and didn't want our 
> message to be lost because we chose to use 'purist terms'.
> 
> I am very concerned that our message could become lost in what is a very 
> complex social issue.
> 
> I am frightened that we will not effectively communicate the importance 
> of RMS and GNU to people like Nigel.
> 
>>> Google is run on free software and simply wouldn't exist if the people 
>>> who built it had been force to use commercial licensed software.
>> (Same again - s/commercial/proprietary/)
> 
> Again, as above, I don't believe that people would get the message.
> 
>>> "Source code is to software what a recipe is to a cake."
> 
>>> It struck us as a bit ironic to suggest charging a fee to come and hear 
>>> a man talk about why you should give your software away for free.
>> I think the letter would be even better without that sentence. (I mean,
>> RMS encourages the use of Free Software commercially as well as in
>> general. I know that _you_ understand that, but I think that sentence
>> might lead Nigel to the wrong idea, maybe.)
> 
> I'm sorry but I don't understand what 'wrong idea' you think Nigel might 
> get.  Can you please explain what you're thinking?
> 
> I'm also not sure you understand what I'm trying to communicate with 
> that statement so I will trying and reword my point.
> 
> Please tell me if you think I've failed in my attempt to say what I'm 
> thinking.
> 
> ...  If I was doing Nigel's job I'd be thinking that if the event is as 
> important as what 'Rik' suggests then it should have 'real money value'. 
>   Rik's mates should be able to sell tickets to the event to more than 
> cover the cost of the hall, after all they're not even going to need $2 
> per person if they fill the hall.  They should be able to raise other 
> commercial sponsorship from computer firms (wouldn't Telecom or Telstra 
> like to have their name on the door?! - What about Xerox?).
> 
> I want to explain to Nigel why we're only asking for donations and not 
> stating a price.  I wanted him to understand why a commercial 
> sponsorship is not really appropriate.
> 
> 
> Tim I would like to hear what others think as well.
> 
> Cheers Don
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GNUz mailing list
> GNUz at inode.co.nz
> http://lists.ourshack.com/mailman/listinfo/gnuz